From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31642 invoked by alias); 15 Mar 2011 15:53:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 31616 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Mar 2011 15:53:45 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-out.google.com (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.44.51) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 15 Mar 2011 15:53:37 +0000 Received: from hpaq7.eem.corp.google.com (hpaq7.eem.corp.google.com [172.25.149.7]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id p2FFrZJn021130 for ; Tue, 15 Mar 2011 08:53:35 -0700 Received: from vws2 (vws2.prod.google.com [10.241.21.130]) by hpaq7.eem.corp.google.com with ESMTP id p2FFqS0m025290 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 15 Mar 2011 08:53:33 -0700 Received: by vws2 with SMTP id 2so678951vws.20 for ; Tue, 15 Mar 2011 08:53:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.53.14 with SMTP id k14mr1551224vcg.163.1300204412523; Tue, 15 Mar 2011 08:53:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.60.9 with HTTP; Tue, 15 Mar 2011 08:52:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110315154323.GA19189@host1.jankratochvil.net> References: <20110315004140.GA28560@host1.jankratochvil.net> <20110315154323.GA19189@host1.jankratochvil.net> From: Paul Pluzhnikov Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 16:00:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [patch] Re: Advice on fixing gdb/12528 To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches ml , Doug Evans Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-System-Of-Record: true X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-03/txt/msg00788.txt.bz2 On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 8:43 AM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 16:29:53 +0100, Tom Tromey wrote: >> What Jan means is that you can put a .S file into gdb.dwarf2. >> That way the test is independent of compiler version (but unfortunately >> then dependent on arch). > > Or coded like ... > But in both cases it is a pain to code it by hand. Thanks for clarification. Since it doesn't appear that I actually have to do it the painful way (at least not on platforms which support linker --gc-sections), is it ok to keep the test as is? It probably belongs to gdb.base then. Thanks, -- Paul Pluzhnikov